A report providing the Sub-Committee with an update and response to a petition requesting the Council grant licensed hackney carriage vehicles access to use the A33 bus lanes.

Further to Minute 4(b) of the meeting held on 13 June 2024, the Sub-Committee received a report that provided them with an update and response to a petition that had requested the Council grant licensed hackney carriage vehicles access to use the A33 bus lanes.

The report explained that the south Reading Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) scheme had delivered a series of bus priority measures on the A33 Relief Road between Mereoak Park and Ride and the town centre since the first section had opened in 2018.  The latest phase of delivery was currently between Rose Kiln Lane (south) and Rose Kiln Lane (north).  The BRT lanes on the A33 were characterised by the provision of an additional lane for buses to the current dual carriageway and therefore did not result in any loss of capacity for regular vehicles.  The scheme had been designed as a BRT scheme to mirror the priority afforded to either a light tram or guided bus way system whilst also enabling the flexibility that the use of regular bus vehicles provided.  Therefore, in order to maintain this characteristic, the BRT lanes did not provide permanent access for any  vehicles other than bus services and therefore excluded use by  taxis, motorcycles or cyclists who were able to use the dedicated cycle path along the A33. 

The design of the south Reading BRT was that there were bus stops within the BRT lanes without any lay-bys meaning buses would, from time to time, be stopping at these bus stops to pick up and drop off passengers.  By allowing use of the bus lanes by other vehicles, such as hackney carriage vehicles, this would result in these vehicles looking to merge into the regular traffic lane where vehicles could be travelling at up to 40 mph to pass the buses.  This would represent a safety hazard should vehicles look to leave the bus lane, which would also be an illegal manoeuvrer, as it would involve vehicles crossing the solid bus lane road markings.  The speed limit on the highway at all other bus lanes in Reading which did allow access for licensed hackney carriages, was either 20 mph or 30 mph.

Since its introduction the south Reading BRT had delivered faster journey times and passenger growth on this important corridor into central Reading.  Journey times for buses using the corridor had reduced by 24% from 2015 making these services among the most reliable in the Reading area and average passenger numbers had increased by 62% between 2015 to 2019.

In addition, the bus lane, and particularly where it merged with general traffic, had been designed on the basis of only buses being permitted to use these lanes.  For locations where the merge was supported by traffic signals, it was very likely that the timings would need to be altered to support the additional vehicles in the lane, to the detriment of traffic flow on the A33.  A full review of the bus lane would also be required, as well as a new Road Safety Audit to ensure that the highway remained safe for all road users.  It was likely that physical works would be required to address the potential risks that would be created by this proposal. The report therefore proposed that the requested alterations to access along the A33 Bus Lanes by licensed hackney carriage vehicles should not be agreed.

At the invitation of the Chair, Asif Rashid, Chair of the Reading Taxi Association, addressed the Sub-Committee in favour of Reading licensed hackney carriage vehicles being granted access to use the A33 bus lanes.  Peter Seymour, also addressed the Sub-Committee on behalf of the Reading Motorcycle Action Group.

The Sub-Committee discussed the report and agreed by a majority that Reading Borough Council licenced hackney carriage vehicles should not be given access to the A33 bus lanes at this time.

Resolved –

(1)     That the report be noted;

(2)     That access to the A33 bus lanes by Reading Borough Council licenced hackney carriage vehicles not be implemented due to the reasons set out in the report;

(3)     That the lead petitioner be informed of the decision following publication of the minutes.

(Councillor Ayub declared an interest in the above item on the grounds that he owned a hackney carriage. He left the room and took no part in the discussion or decision making.)